If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

If you knew he'd have back to back years where he put up 29 HR's with 100+ RBI's and another with 19 HR's and 100+ RBI's while winning a gold glove and haven't one of the best arms in MLB, you wouldn't wanna sign him to a 3 or 4 yr deal?

Obviously we don't know this, but he seems to be worth a shot and if his best season's match Francoeur's best, I'd take that for sure. It'd easily be better than anything we have.

If his ceiling is Francoeur, and we sign him and he reaches his so-called ceiling in 2 or 3 yrs, that'd be perfect timing to have an OFer having his best couple yrs of good power and 100+ RBI's. cuz it's hopefully when we expect to start competing again. We have no OFer's right now... Literally none. We have a bunch of guys that should be bench players or still in the minors. What's the harm in adding Alvarez since he probably wouldn't cost too much and definitely has the potential to be our current best OFer.

I already said they should sign Alvarez, and assign him to AA. But I doubt he has the potential to be our current best OF. In 2-3 years, maybe he could be. Not current.

As for Francoeur, we have several guys already who are better, and will probably sign Hairston who is better as well. Last season we also had Torres, who was better than Francoeur. I just don't think you grasp how truly bad Francoeur is. He's another guy who should be a bench player or a minor leaguer.

I would even rather have Torres back than have Francoeur. Even without signing Hairston, there are 5 guys on the roster now who were better than Francoeur last season, and who project to be better than Francoeur next season.

I've already said I was underestimating Alvarez with the Francoeur comp, but if he doesn't learn to draw a walk, he's really might not be better than a guy like Valdespin.

He's not an MLB CF. He's a LF who is about the same age as Kirk, and with about as much power as Kirk. But he can't play CF and he doesn't walk. He doesn't strike out like Kirk, so maybe he'll hit for enough average to be as good as Kirk, and maybe there's some projection there where he can be even better, but I don't think it's a sure thing.

Of course I'm not saying that he'd be that kinda player, but you just said if we knew he would have those seasons, you wouldn't want him... Sorry I just don't understand.

If you are going to sign a guy for 5-6 years, you do so hoping he will be good for more than a season or two. If Francoeur had repeated his 2006-2007 performance consistently over the last 5 seasons, he'd maybe be an OK starter. Instead, he's had 1 good year in the last 5.

I already said they should sign Alvarez, and assign him to AA. But I doubt he has the potential to be our current best OF. In 2-3 years, maybe he could be. Not current.

As for Francoeur, we have several guys already who are better, and will probably sign Hairston who is better as well. Last season we also had Torres, who was better than Francoeur. I just don't think you grasp how truly bad Francoeur is. He's another guy who should be a bench player or a minor leaguer.

I would even rather have Torres back than have Francoeur. Even without signing Hairston, there are 5 guys on the roster now who were better than Francoeur last season, and who project to be better than Francoeur next season.

I've already said I was underestimating Alvarez with the Francoeur comp, but if he doesn't learn to draw a walk, he's really might not be better than a guy like Valdespin.

He's not an MLB CF. He's a LF who is about the same age as Kirk, and with about as much power as Kirk. But he can't play CF and he doesn't walk. He doesn't strike out like Kirk, so maybe he'll hit for enough average to be as good as Kirk, and maybe there's some projection there where he can be even better, but I don't think it's a sure thing.

So you're using these voodoo stats to show that Mets scrubs and never-beens are better than Francoeur? It's why some of these stats are ridiculous.

Baxter is better than Francoeur???? Really???? In a game situation we'd rather have Vspin or Niewenhaus up there???? Or Cowsill???? Gimmee a brake with this stuff.

Francoeur is up and down and an average player but he's had some pretty good seasons. The others have done nothing. I don't want Francoeur back; but putting him on a list behind these guys is laughable.

Are there any stats about how often stats are thrown at a player???? Francoeur has the be the most over statisticalized player in history.

Baxter is better than Francoeur???? Really???? In a game situation we'd rather have Vspin or Niewenhaus up there???? Or Cowsill???? Gimmee a brake with this stuff.

Even if you consider it some crazy modern new-fangled vodoo idea that hitters shouldn't make outs, consider that only one season out of the last 5 has Francoeur not been below average even at driving in runs. Compare what all of the above did last season when they came to the plate with base runners on base. How likely was the runner to score as a result of that player's plate appearance? Francoeur came to the plate with 355 runners on last season, and 38 of them scored, or 10.7%. Here is how those others fared:

Even if you look at the last 5 seasons of data, Francoeur is only at 13.5% in this metric, well below league average, and comparable to Torres last year. Even if you look at his HR rate for those 5 years (one per 40.6 PA), it's much lower than Hairston's (1 per 24 PA) in that time, or than Valdespin's (1 per 25.8 PA) or Duda's (1 per 31 PA) so far and only very slightly ahead of Kirk Nieuwenhuis (1 per 44.9 PA).

So even if you completely ignore everything Francoeur totally sucks at, and focus on his one relative strength, he's really not even better at that one thing than what we already have. If you consider overall baseball ability, I think a Gm would be out of his mind right now to choose Francoeur over any of Baxter, Duda, Nieuwenhuis, or Valdespin.

The Mets traded a good prospect for Cowgill. They traded Francoeur for Joaquin Arias.

Yeah, many people do not think twice about who the Mets gave up for Cowgill, but in many peoples eyes Marte has more potential or think he may be better than Flores. Marte is a prospect, is not like they gave away a non prospect for this kid.

Francoeur is a player who has shown that he has the ability to actually do something in the past. Isn't there a reason why Baxter was just floating around out there???? And Cowgill.

VSpin, Kirk and Duda may be something someday both the've proved nothing so far.

If all those players were cut loose to the DFA list, I believe Francoeur would be picked ahead of most of them. And if he wasn't it would be salary related more than ability related.

I wouldn't build around Francoeur nor pay him what he is probably making. All I'm saying, is given what we seem to have out there now, I'd rather have Francoeur.

Not enough energy in this forum is spent pondering which players are here because they're good players versus which ones are here because they're affordable. We should also be wondering which players will be brought in because they're good versus who will be brought in because he's affordable.

Not enough energy in this forum is spent pondering which players are here because they're good players versus which ones are here because they're affordable. We should also be wondering which players will be brought in because they're good versus who will be brought in because he's affordable.

Yeah, many people do not think twice about who the Mets gave up for Cowgill, but in many peoples eyes Marte has more potential or think he may be better than Flores. Marte is a prospect, is not like they gave away a non prospect for this kid.

Yup. I hated that trade. I'm a huge fan of Marte and Aderlin Rodriguez. I'd be devastated if they give up A-Rod. I think he can be our 1B of the future.